Interventions involving nudge theory for COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Health Psychology Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-25 DOI:10.1037/hea0001400

Jiarong Zhang, Hui Jin

{"title":"Interventions involving nudge theory for COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Jiarong Zhang, Hui Jin","doi":"10.1037/hea0001400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: New approaches to mitigate vaccine hesitancy and improve vaccine uptake are urgently needed. Nudging has shown effective results in several health areas. However, the effectiveness of interventions involving nudge theory in increasing COVID-19 vaccination remains unclear.Method: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for randomized controlled trials published before December 31, 2022, to determine whether interventions involving nudge theory improved COVID-19 vaccination behavior and intent. Risk ratio (RR) and a 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as pooled measures to assess vaccination behavior. Intention to vaccinate was reported in a narrative synthesis.Results: Sixteen randomized controlled trials involving 176,125 participants were included. Interventions involving nudge theory weakly boosted the COVID-19 vaccine uptake rate (RR = 1.21, 95% CI [1.07, 1.36], p < .01). Subgroup analysis showed a weak positive effect of social norms (RR = 2.04, 95% CI [1.61, 2.57]), defaults (RR = 1.32, 95% CI [1.03, 1.69]), and salient reminders (RR = 1.19, 95% CI [1.04, 1.36]). Nudge interventions integrating multiple components were more efficacious in increasing vaccination rates compared to nudge alone. The effect of nudging interventions weakened over time (p < .001). Most studies (10 of 11) involving vaccination intention outcomes showed positive or partially positive results.Conclusions: Interventions involving nudge theory can promote COVID-19 vaccination behavior and intentions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":55066,"journal":{"name":"Health Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"779-790"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0001400","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: New approaches to mitigate vaccine hesitancy and improve vaccine uptake are urgently needed. Nudging has shown effective results in several health areas. However, the effectiveness of interventions involving nudge theory in increasing COVID-19 vaccination remains unclear.

Method: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for randomized controlled trials published before December 31, 2022, to determine whether interventions involving nudge theory improved COVID-19 vaccination behavior and intent. Risk ratio (RR) and a 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as pooled measures to assess vaccination behavior. Intention to vaccinate was reported in a narrative synthesis.

Results: Sixteen randomized controlled trials involving 176,125 participants were included. Interventions involving nudge theory weakly boosted the COVID-19 vaccine uptake rate (RR = 1.21, 95% CI [1.07, 1.36], p < .01). Subgroup analysis showed a weak positive effect of social norms (RR = 2.04, 95% CI [1.61, 2.57]), defaults (RR = 1.32, 95% CI [1.03, 1.69]), and salient reminders (RR = 1.19, 95% CI [1.04, 1.36]). Nudge interventions integrating multiple components were more efficacious in increasing vaccination rates compared to nudge alone. The effect of nudging interventions weakened over time (p < .001). Most studies (10 of 11) involving vaccination intention outcomes showed positive or partially positive results.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

利用推力理论对 COVID-19 疫苗接种进行干预：系统回顾和荟萃分析。

目标：亟需新的方法来缓解疫苗接种犹豫并提高疫苗接种率。推导理论已在多个健康领域取得了有效成果。然而，涉及推导理论的干预措施在提高 COVID-19 疫苗接种率方面的效果仍不明确：我们检索了 PubMed、Web of Science 和 Scopus 上 2022 年 12 月 31 日之前发表的随机对照试验，以确定涉及推导理论的干预措施是否能改善 COVID-19 疫苗接种行为和意向。风险比 (RR) 和 95% 置信区间 (CI) 被用作评估疫苗接种行为的综合指标。结果：共纳入 16 项随机对照试验，涉及 176 125 名参与者。涉及推力理论的干预措施微弱地提高了 COVID-19 疫苗的接种率（RR = 1.21，95% CI [1.07，1.36]，p < .01）。分组分析表明，社会规范（RR = 2.04，95% CI [1.61，2.57]）、默认（RR = 1.32，95% CI [1.03，1.69]）和显著提醒（RR = 1.19，95% CI [1.04，1.36]）的积极作用较弱。在提高疫苗接种率方面，整合了多种成分的劝导干预比单独使用劝导干预更有效。随着时间的推移，劝导干预的效果逐渐减弱（p < .001）。大多数涉及疫苗接种意向结果的研究（11 项中的 10 项）都显示出积极或部分积极的结果：结论：涉及推导理论的干预措施可促进 COVID-19 疫苗接种行为和意向。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA，保留所有权利）。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Health Psychology 医学-心理学

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

2.40%

发文量

170

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Health Psychology publishes articles on psychological, biobehavioral, social, and environmental factors in physical health and medical illness, and other issues in health psychology.